Some arguments for vegetarianism

[Father Heathen]

I don't think animals are capable of the kind of moral thought of humans. If my cats tried to kill each other, I would still stop them however. I wouldn't throw up my hands and say "Oh well... its just their way".

But would you interfere with a carnivorous species' hunt and attempt to prevent it from catching it's prey, to the point of starvation? What authority obligates humans to deviate from the diet nature intended for them?

 

[Madhuri]

But would you interfere with a carnivorous species' hunt and attempt to prevent it from catching it's prey, to the point of starvation? What authority obligates humans to deviate from the diet nature intended for them?

There is no authority. Not even nature is an authority. We have a body that allows us great choice. So think about this issues, think about what matters to you most, and make a choice.

For people like me, it matters more to minimise suffering for animals than to eat a corpse (no offense, I just think that meat is really gross).

 

[Madhuri]

How do I post pics?

 

[Father Heathen]

Hit the

button and copy & paste the image URL into the field.

 

[Madhuri]

Thanks!

 

[Zephyr]

Thanks!

I normally hate lolcats (and macros in general) because they're old and overplayed, but damn it that thing's cute.

 

[MSizer]

Just out of curiousity, do you believe that we are morally obliged to abstain from meat simply because we are thinking beings? I ask, because even though one might consider animals to be thinking, feeling, conscious individuals, that does not negate the fact that in nature, some animals are going to be eaten by other animals, and that's just how it works. Biologically speaking, we are omnivores. I agree that we eat too much meat, and our methods of procuring our meat is ethically and environmentally questionable, if not down-right wrong. But I have a hard time finding issue with the hunter, who takes down a wild deer for his sustenance. That is, after all, only the natural order of things.

Animals eating other animals in the wild is nothing like farming animals for food consumption. A wild animal has opportunities to flourish, some even have defense mechanisms to try to prevent being eaten, so they have an equal chance among peers of living a content life. When we farm animals for food (or for any reason) we not only deprive them the opportunity to die comfortably, but we even restrict their ability to live thier short lives comfortably. Some people say to me "when you say that animals can flourish, or live contently, you're anthropomorphizing, they don't have the same mind capacity that we have". I disagree completely that I am anthropomorphizing. If it is true that their reduced intelligence negates them from our moral agency, then we should be able to farm handicapped people for food (BEFORE anyone freaks out - OF Course i don't think we should!)

 

[Falvlun]

Animals eating other animals in the wild is nothing like farming animals for food consumption. A wild animal has opportunities to flourish, some even have defense mechanisms to try to prevent being eaten, so they have an equal chance among peers of living a content life. When we farm animals for food (or for any reason) we not only deprive them the opportunity to die comfortably, but we even restrict their ability to live thier short lives comfortably. Some people say to me "when you say that animals can flourish, or live contently, you're anthropomorphizing, they don't have the same mind capacity that we have". I disagree completely that I am anthropomorphizing. If it is true that their reduced intelligence negates them from our moral agency, then we should be able to farm handicapped people for food (BEFORE anyone freaks out - OF Course i don't think we should!)

So you agree that hunting for meat is fine, but the way we farm our meat is morally icky?

Humans are fortunate in that we have a system which allows us to eat a great variety of food and survive on a number of diets. We are perfectly capable of surviving without meat in contemporary society as we have access to many nutritional foods.

Agreed.

Though, to be fair, veggie burgers and other vegatarian meat replacements tend to be rather expensive. I love my black beans, but some variety is nice.

The choice to be vegetarian is not relevant then to what is natural (in my opinion). What makes us very different to other animals is that we have this quality known as emphathy. We are able to understand that another creature can suffer, and that our own actions can contribute to this suffering. It is because of this understanding that a person may develop a feeling of moral obligation to reduce the suffering that is rampant in this world.

It is possible to eat meat, and cause a minimum of suffering, such as by hunting wild game and/or raising your own meat. The animal in the former scenario would live a normal life, and its life would also end normally and naturally-- at the hands of a predator. As for raising your own animals, this eliminates the horrible living conditions farmed animals face; your cow could live a pampered existence. And when it came time to harvest it, a bullet to the brain would likely kill it before it even felt the pain.

Many things are natural, but what we consider good or bad or moral and immoral are subjective. I do not follow the rational that just because something is natural it is justifiable. That would make many things that our current society and culture consider immoral to be completely fine.

Good point.

I think the "natural" argument, however, has a lot of weight.

 

[Mister Emu]

Besides, most people don't get a sick, wrong feeling when they don't eat meat and yet they do when they are cruel to an animal. Confronted with this difference, it seems more reasonable to simply give up meat than insist that the thing that doesn't feel right, is right.

For most people eating meat feels just fine... No one is insisting that cruelty to animals should feel right...

the former being morally dubious whilst the latter is fairly guilt free

I don't find it morally dubious at all... completely neutral in my opinion...

we even restrict their ability to live thier short lives comfortably.

I beg to differ... this is not necessary...

The Wagyu cattle that produce Kobe beef, for instance, receive massages every day, and are slaughtered painlessly...

 

[Valjean]

For most people, killing or mistreating certain "out groups" feels just fine. Mr E. Our feelings are culturally ingrained.

You'd have no objections to your mother being raised and killed in the manner of a wagyu cow, then?

 

[McBell]

It should be emphasised that being vegetarian is a personal choice based on a particular rational and subjective moral thinking.

No it shouldn't.
I am a vegetarian, but solely do to medical reasons.

 

[McBell]

You'd have no objections to your mother being raised and killed in the manner of a wagyu cow, then?

I fail to understand your comparison.
Are you saying that you think your mother is equal to a cow?

 

[Madhuri]

No it shouldn't.
I am a vegetarian, but solely do to medical reasons.

In the context of moral argument, it is an important emphasis to make. Of course there are other reasons.

 

[Valjean]

I fail to understand your comparison.
Are you saying that you think your mother is equal to a cow?

Yes, of course.
Why would she not be?

 

[McBell]

In the context of moral argument, it is an important emphasis to make. Of course there are other reasons.

Fair enough.

My apologies for misreading your post.

 

[Panda]

Yes, of course.
Why would she not be?

Because humans are of more worth.

 

[McBell]

Yes, of course.
Why would she not be?

I am not saying she should or should not be.
I am merely trying to understand your PoV.

 

[McBell]

Because humans are of more worth.

Based on what, exactly?

 

[Panda]

Based on what, exactly?

Purely subjective. To me the life of a human is more important than one of an animal.

 

[Madhuri]

Fair enough.

My apologies for misreading your post.

That's fine